29 Jun '13 12:38>
http://phys.org/news/2013-06-mimicking-cells-ribosomes.html
The creationists will have a fit when mankind makes life from scratch.
The creationists will have a fit when mankind makes life from scratch.
Originally posted by sonhouseNo they will just idiotically claim that all it proves is that you need intelligence to create life.
http://phys.org/news/2013-06-mimicking-cells-ribosomes.html
The creationists will have a fit when mankind makes life from scratch.
Originally posted by humyOf course that would put a strain on an already bloated human population so when that comes about there will be new rules and laws respecting the creation of new babies vs the expanded lifespan of the rebuilt humans. Maybe they would create a system where the retreads are told to start over on Mars or Europa, thus relieving the population stress.
I have just read the link and they have made perfectly functional ribosomes from scratch. I am surprised that science as progressed enough already that they have already been able to make such an extremely complex organic structure and made it perfectly fully functional! Even with current science, that certainly could not have been an easy thing to do! ...[text shortened]... down the throat of a giant living artificial stomach to convert it into biofuel and fertilizers.
Originally posted by EladarMany albeit not all creationists claim and believe that it is impossible for us humans to ever design life from scratch because they believe that life is too complex to be made that way and only a god with infinite intelligence can make life.
Why?
Originally posted by humyI don't make that claim.
Many albeit not all creationists claim and believe that it is impossible for us humans to ever design life from scratch because they believe that life is too complex to be made that way and only a god with infinite intelligence can make life.
But I think when we do make life from scratch, the typical response from such a creationist would either be denial, wit ...[text shortened]... and perhaps even pretend he never denied the possibility and even convince himself he never did.
Originally posted by Eladar
I don't make that claim.
Simply because something can happen, it doesn't mean it must happen.
If God created the universe by way of 'natural' means when He created, does that negate the fact that God created both the universe and how it works?
If God created the universe by way of 'natural' means when He created, does that negate the fact that God created both the universe and how it works?
Originally posted by humyIf God created the universe by way of 'natural' means when He created, does that negate the [b]factthat God created both the universe and how it works?
Originally posted by EladarMy apology; somehow read that too fast and skipped the "if".
I never said that it is a fact. I'm just saying that if it is a fact, then Science can neither prove it nor disprove it.
Notice I started out the statement with an 'If' which means let's assume that it is true. If we assume that it is true, then we treat what we assume is true as fact.
Hope this little intellectual exercise is a little easier to understand after the explanation.
Originally posted by humyI can see your point of view, if you make the same assumption most people around you are making. As long as enough of us think that our assumption is truth, then anyone who disagrees must be simply ignorant. As you know, our assumption must be absolutely true, otherwise why would most of us believe it?
My apology; somehow read that too fast and skipped the "if".
Still, I think I should still point out that no person in this age of science and reason can rationally seriously think that "God created the universe".
And Many albeit not all creationists DO claim and believe that it is impossible for us humans to ever design life from scratch.
Originally posted by Eladar
I can see your point of view, if you make the same assumption most people around you are making. As long as enough of us think that our assumption is truth, then anyone who disagrees must be simply ignorant. As you know, our assumption must be absolutely true, otherwise why would most of us believe it?
[b]When we do finally create life from scratch, it c ...[text shortened]... e goal posts.
I see you have faith that it will happen, even if it happens after you die.[/b]
I can see your point of view, if you make the same assumption most people around you are making. As long as enough of us think that our assumption is truth, then anyone who disagrees must be simply ignorant. As you know, our assumption must be absolutely true, otherwise why would most of us believe it?
I see you have faith that it will happen, even if it happens after you die.
Originally posted by humyAny assumption that is different from the one we personally hold is 'very stupid to believe'. If it wasn't, then I'd believe it!
No, that is NOT my reasoning. The reason why I don't believe there is a god is the same reason why I don't believe there is a supernatural teacup orbiting Mars; in both cases the hypothesis cannot be disproved but it is very stupid to believe something just because it cannot be disproved! And, using the principle of Occam's razor combined with it is not rationa ...[text shortened]... tremely well qualified 'assumption' that is the only one any rational person can make.
Originally posted by Eladaryes, but that doesn't stop the possibility of one side being right and the other moronic. If there is a side that is right, it probably be a side that uses flawless reason and that flawless reasoning should involve the use of the principle of Occam's razor combined with it is not rational to believe something unless it is falsifiable except those first principles that are essential to make to make none trivial models of reality (such as the principle of induction and the assumption that the world you see is real and not all just a dream etc) -this has been independently worked out by many good philosophers (including Bertrand Russell) and many other intelligent people.
Any assumption that is different from the one we personally hold is 'very stupid to believe'. If it wasn't, then I'd believe it!
It's a story played out over and over again on the internet. Two sides have a disagreement and everyone who agrees with your position will tell you that you destroyed the other person in the 'debate'.
Everyone is right in his or her own mind. Anyone who disagrees is a moron!
Originally posted by humyNo, it doesn't negate the possibility. It is possible that one side is right or it is possible that both sides could be wrong.
yes, but that doesn't stop the possibility of one side being right and the other moronic. If there is a side that is right, it probably be a side that uses flawless reason and that flawless reasoning should involve the use of the principle of Occam's razor combined with it is not rational to believe something unless it is falsifiable except those first principl ...[text shortened]... has been independently worked out by many good philosophers and many other intelligent people.